/lit/ - Literature

>>22649387
No, I don't like it because it's fundamentally incomplete.

>>22640696
We didn't create this world our ourselves.
All philosophy is anthropocentric and erroneous (see Godel's Incompleteness Theorems and the rejection of all attempts at axiomatic/ideological/worldview completeness).
Every attempt at Philosophy is a fool's errand in apotheosis and self-salvation/damnation that ALWAYS terminates non-transcendently/Nihilistically as anthropocentrism just circularly leads to anthropocentrism.
Philosophy emerges as a reaction to Poor Theology; whether it is the Greeks with their disappointment with the Hellenistic gods or the Catholics/Aquinas after Schism with developing ADS (De-Ontologizing God to Man).
You can gauge the noetic & spiritual health of a civilization if their producing theologians instead of philosophers.

>>14800394
Obviously math.

>>14714259
You can claim TAG (Transcendental Argument for God) or just regular paradigmatic Transcendental Arrangements are circular, since they are self-prepositional. But then again, even Hume conceded that induction is also circular and would be unjustifiable under a strictly empirical/material framework i.e. you can't really prove where you're getting your logic and reason from and why it works and why it's always true unless you use logic and reason to justify it.

So you're stuck with presupposition epistemology that essentially exist metaphysically. Else you can't really have debates or discussions about epistemology without these metaphysical tools. You'd be using tools like logic, reason, mathematics, space & time, morality/ethics, Truth, etc, without really asking questions about the nature of those things; which is a major flaw of materialist philosophy. It's not like you can look at the material of which logic or mathematics are made, yet we know them to be useful and true because even a material atheist uses them in debate or empiricism or any other epistemic endeavor of discovering truth.

>>13520824
>CTMU
Based Characteristica Universalis seeker

>>13510374
Why not both?